PLAISIMOND v. STATE (2022)

Supreme Court of North Dakota.

Michaelson PLAISIMOND, Petitioner and Appellant v. STATE of North Dakota, Respondent and Appellee

No. 20210215

Decided: January 06, 2022

Samuel A. Gereszek, Grand Forks, ND, for petitioner and appellant; submitted on brief. Julie A. Lawyer, State's Attorney, Bismarck, ND, for respondent and appellee; submitted on brief.

[¶1] Michaelson Plaisimond appeals from a district court order and judgment denying his application for postconviction relief. Plaisimond claims the court erred in denying his application because he received ineffective assistance of counsel. Plaisimond contends his trial attorney failed to advise him on testifying about prior bad acts and the potential ramifications. Following a hearing the court found Plaisimond failed to establish the first prong of the Strickland test that his trial attorney's representation fell below an objective standard of reasonableness. The court also found that even if Plaisimond met the first prong, he did not demonstrate he was prejudiced by the alleged deficient performance.

[¶2] The district court did not clearly err in finding Plaisimond did not prove ineffective assistance of counsel and denying his application for postconviction relief. We summarily affirm under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(2).

Per curiam.

[¶3] Jon J. Jensen, C.J. Gerald W. VandeWalle Daniel J. Crothers Lisa Fair McEvers Jerod E. Tufte

Was this helpful?

Why was this helpful?

Easy to understand

Solved my problem

Other

Why was this not helpful?

Missing the information I need

Too complicated / too many steps

Out of date

Other

Thank you for your feedback!

Welcome to FindLaw's Cases & Codes

A free source of state and federal court opinions, state laws, and the United States Code. For more information about the legal concepts addressed by these cases and statutes visit FindLaw's Learn About the Law.

Go To Learn About The Law